There are many engine rating lists out there, but my personal preference is the CCLR (Computer Chess Rating Lists) list. Another good site is CEGT (Chess Engines Grand Tournament). In any case, here’s a look at some of the top rated engines these days. Also, some links to terminology that may be helpful.
I think the only reason anyone would use any engine other than Stockfish, which is still the one to beat, is someone who plays high level correspondence chess and needs a second opinion from an engine that evaluates positions differently or else somebody who just likes to tinker with engines. Looking at both of the rating lists reveals that all the engines have a poor record against Stockfish.
Fortress
Fischer Timing
Enhanced Forward Pruning
Generating legal moves efficiently
Alpha-beta Pruning
Principal Variation Search
Bitboards
Rotated Bitboards
OPEN SOURCE:
Stockfish
Stockfish is based on another open source chess engine named Glaurung. It features aggressive pruning and late move reductions.
Suger Xpro
SugaR is derived from Stockfish, and supports up to 128 cores. The SugaR engine defaults to one search thread, therefore it’s recommended to inspect Threads UCI parameter to make sure it matches the total number of CPU cores.
Ethereal
Ethereal is an open source engine influenced by Stockfish, MadChess, and Crafty. One reviewer called its play dynamic and profound and said its style reminded him of a coffeehouse player.
Andscacs
It uses magic bitboard to speed up the attack calculations. It applies a principal variation search with transposition table inside an iterative framework. In order to make the engine more powerful and efficient, about 200 evaluation features were optimized with 750,000 positions.
Booot
Booot determines sliding piece attacks with rotated bitboards, and lazy SMP, PVS with search enhancements like late move reductions, null move pruning, and internal iterative deepening.
Xiphos
This is an engine that utilizes bitboards with ERLEF mapping. It also uses sliding piece attacks.
Laser Chess
For more information on this engine visit HERE.
Gull
An engine that applies magic bitboards to determine sliding piece attacks and features Syzygy Bases, PDEP bitboards and Lazy SMP.
FREE:
Fire
Fire used to be open source but later became a closed Windows executable, available for new Intel processors. It features magic bitboards, Syzygy tablebases, configurable hash, and multiPV.
Fizbo
I don’t have much information on this engine, but you can visit the site for full details.
Schooner
Schooner uses alpha-beta search, late move reductions, principle search window (PVS), and single hash entry.
Equinox
Equinox has taken ideas from open source engines like Stockfish, Crafty, and Ippolit.
Critter
The engine features null move pruning, forward pruning, principal variation search, parallel search with up to 8 threads, blockage detection in the endgames, and supports Gaviota tablebases.
Hannibal
Hannibal incorporates ideas from earlier engines (Twisted Logic and Learning). It has a good understanding of material imbalances and has excellent endgame knowledge. It understands fortresses, trapped pieces and will sacrifice material for the initiative when conducting a K-side attack. Interesting is that it is tuned for the Fischer time control.
COMMERCIAL:
Komodo
Komodo was derived from an older search engine, Doch. It has a different positional style as it relies on evaluation, instead of depth. The engine supports up to 64 cores, Syzygy endgame tablebase, and Fischer random chess. Kodomo lets you save engine’s analysis of a position so you can check it later and resume analysis. You can also control how the engine makes long-term sacrifices of P-structure.
Houdini
Houdini is known for its positional style, ability to defend strongly, tenacity indifficult positions and ability to escape with a draw. To date, it has won 3 seasons of Top Chess Engine Championship.
Deep Shredder
Shredder is a commercial chess engine built in 1993 that has won more than 20 titles. Deep Shredder is the multiprocessor version of Shredder and comes with a graphical user interface and is compatible with other UCI engines. It’s ultra-fast and highly intelligent. In selecting moves, most engines use brute force (they try to see everything for many moves ahead), but today programs today don't evaluate as many positions as possible; they try to “understand” a position and cut out moves that don’t seem to fit. Shredder's play is extremely solid positionally and some say it is human like.
Fritz
This engine has been around for years. For all the particular see HERE.
Chiron
The latest version has been tuned deeply, especially in terms of passing pawns and mobility, and several search enhancements have been introduced, like lazy symmetric multiprocessing, forward pruning, and NUMA awareness.
Random Posts
Thursday, February 28, 2019
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
Vladimir Simagin
GM Lubomir Kavalek told the story of how on the night of August 21, 1968 his wife met Simagin pacing back and forth in the lobby of a hotel in Polanica Zdroj, repeating:”Stupid people, stupid people, stupid people.” Simagin explained to her that Soviet tanks had invaded Czechoclovakia overnight.
The Rubinstein memorial in the spa town of Polanica Zdroj, which is only about 20 miles from the border where the Soviets crossed, continued. But, because of the confusion of the times many of the games were not published and the arbiter planned to publish them later, but on a train journey home someone stole his briefcase and the games were lost to posterity. Trying to find complete information on the tournament is therefore impossible.
Kavalek wrote that after the invasion, Smyslov remained silent while Simagin, who had been Smyslov’s second during his world championship matches, was exhausted and distressed.
Kavalek described Simagin as a philosopher who believed that violence has no place in our lives and it is best to leave it on the chessboard and the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia had broken his heart. It can't happen in the United States...or can it? Read an article at Ammo.com HERE.
Vladimir Simagin (June 21, 1919 – September 25, 1968) was a Russian GM who won the Moscow City Championship in 1947, 1956 and 1959 and who made many significant contributions to the openings. He was much admired as both a player and teacher. He was awarded the IM title in 1950 and the GM title in 1962. He was also an IM in correspondence play and won the Soviet correspondence championship in 1964.
As a high school student he was often among the winners of junior tournaments. His play was distinguished by originality and he was always experimenting and taking risks with the result that mistakes were common. Friends often asked why he played opening variations that no one else played, but he consistently followed his own path. Nevertheless, many of his ideas turned out to be feasible and soon became popular. At the same time, his tournament success increased.
He was awarded the title of Soviet Master at the age of 24 in 1944 for his fine showing in the Moscow City Championship. In the mid-1940s his success in the city championships can be assessed by the fact that players like Smyslov, Bondarevsky, Kotov, Lilienthal, Ragozin, Alatortsev and Panov were participating.
He died of a heart attack at the early age of 49 while playing in a tournament in Kislovodsk which is in the North Caucasus region of Russia. The tournament was won by Geller who scored 10.0-5.0. At the time of his demise, Simagin’s score was +4 -4 =3, so his 5.5-5.5 score with four unplayed games placed him in a tie for 13th-14th places out of 15.
The following game attracted a lot of interest because of Simagin’s ingenious and play.
The Rubinstein memorial in the spa town of Polanica Zdroj, which is only about 20 miles from the border where the Soviets crossed, continued. But, because of the confusion of the times many of the games were not published and the arbiter planned to publish them later, but on a train journey home someone stole his briefcase and the games were lost to posterity. Trying to find complete information on the tournament is therefore impossible.
Kavalek wrote that after the invasion, Smyslov remained silent while Simagin, who had been Smyslov’s second during his world championship matches, was exhausted and distressed.
Kavalek described Simagin as a philosopher who believed that violence has no place in our lives and it is best to leave it on the chessboard and the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia had broken his heart. It can't happen in the United States...or can it? Read an article at Ammo.com HERE.
Vladimir Simagin (June 21, 1919 – September 25, 1968) was a Russian GM who won the Moscow City Championship in 1947, 1956 and 1959 and who made many significant contributions to the openings. He was much admired as both a player and teacher. He was awarded the IM title in 1950 and the GM title in 1962. He was also an IM in correspondence play and won the Soviet correspondence championship in 1964.
As a high school student he was often among the winners of junior tournaments. His play was distinguished by originality and he was always experimenting and taking risks with the result that mistakes were common. Friends often asked why he played opening variations that no one else played, but he consistently followed his own path. Nevertheless, many of his ideas turned out to be feasible and soon became popular. At the same time, his tournament success increased.
He was awarded the title of Soviet Master at the age of 24 in 1944 for his fine showing in the Moscow City Championship. In the mid-1940s his success in the city championships can be assessed by the fact that players like Smyslov, Bondarevsky, Kotov, Lilienthal, Ragozin, Alatortsev and Panov were participating.
He died of a heart attack at the early age of 49 while playing in a tournament in Kislovodsk which is in the North Caucasus region of Russia. The tournament was won by Geller who scored 10.0-5.0. At the time of his demise, Simagin’s score was +4 -4 =3, so his 5.5-5.5 score with four unplayed games placed him in a tie for 13th-14th places out of 15.
The following game attracted a lot of interest because of Simagin’s ingenious and play.
[Event "Moscow Championship"]
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1946.2.17"]
[Round "15"]
[White "Vasily Panov"]
[Black "Vladimir Simagin"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Bg5 Bg7 {Today this is known s the Pirc
Defense, but in Russia it was called the Ufimtsev Defense. } 5. Qd2 h6 6. Bh4
{The most common reply these days, but at the time it was thought 9.Bf4 was
better. } 6... O-O {Almost never played today. Usually black prefers 6...Nbd7
although the riskier 6...g5 is also common. } 7. O-O-O c6 8. e5 {It's likely
that this is premature. By holding back on this move and playing 8.f4 white
would have had better prospects. } 8... Nd5 9. f4 Bf5 10. Bd3 Bxd3 11. Nxd5
cxd5 12. Qxd3 Nc6 13. Be1 {Panov is over finessing. Simply 13.Nf3 was
better} 13... Qc7 14. Nf3 a5 15. Kb1 Rfc8 16. Rc1 e6 17. h4 dxe5 18. fxe5 Nb4
19. Qd2 Qc4 20. b3 Qb5 21. h5 g5 22. c3 {After this black trades Qs and gains
a positional advantage. He could have tried a K-side attack with the
interesting 22.Nxg5 hxg5 23.h6! (Not 23.Qxh5+ followed by h6 when black's
defensive resources should be adequate) 23...Bf8 29.Qxh5+ followed by Rh3 and
white has a winning attack. Black's best defense to 22.Nxg5 was to play
22...Rc7 and double Rs on the c-file. Even then white has excellent chances.
} 22... Qd3+ 23. Qxd3 Nxd3 24. Rc2 Rc6 25. Bd2 Rac8 {An even better plan
appears to be transferring the N to e4 with 25...Nf2-e4 followed by the
advance of the a-Pawn. } 26. Rf1 f6 {Kotov and Yudovich praised this as
shaking the foundations of white's position, but white's position, while
difficult, is hardly lost. } 27. exf6 Bxf6 28. g4 Kg7 29. a4 Rb6 {White's
position is becoming difficult because all of his pieces lack scope and black
is threatening to advance his b-Pawn. } 30. Ra2 Rxb3+ 31. Kc2 {At first glance
it seems as though black has been outwitted, but Simagin has planned for this.
} 31... Rbxc3+ 32. Bxc3 Nb4+ 33. Kb2 Nxa2 34. Bxa5 {It looks like black is
about to lose his N, but Simagin has prepared for this also. } 34... Rc4 35.
Be1 {After this white is lost thanks to Simagin's clever maneuver. After
35.Ra1 Nb4 36.Bxb4 it's hard to seen how black can force a win. } 35... Nc1
36. Bg3 Nd3+ {The N has slipped away and returned to its strong position on c3
and black's wins the d-Pawn. Very clever maneuvering by Simagin! } 37. Kb3
Bxd4 38. Nxd4 Rxd4 39. Kc3 Rxg4 40. Bd6 Nf4 {The N occupies another strong
square and at this point white is quite helpless. } 41. Re1 Rg3+ 42. Kc2 Rg2+
43. Kc3 d4+ 44. Kc4 {Craftier was 44.Kxd4 and if 44...Nxh5 45.Rxe6 Rg4+ 46.Ke4
offering the a-Pawn as bait. If black bites with 46...Rxa4?? white has a
perpetual with 47.Re7+ thanks to the N on h5 blocking the Ks escape. Black
can avoid all such monkeyshines with 46...Rf4 though} 44... Rc2+ 45. Kb3
{Capturing on d4 is out...after 45...Rd2+ white will lose his B. } 45... d3
46. Rd1 Re2 47. a5 e5 48. Rb1 Kf7 49. Ka3 Ke6 0-1
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1946.2.17"]
[Round "15"]
[White "Vasily Panov"]
[Black "Vladimir Simagin"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 d6 2. d4 Nf6 3. Nc3 g6 4. Bg5 Bg7 {Today this is known s the Pirc
Defense, but in Russia it was called the Ufimtsev Defense. } 5. Qd2 h6 6. Bh4
{The most common reply these days, but at the time it was thought 9.Bf4 was
better. } 6... O-O {Almost never played today. Usually black prefers 6...Nbd7
although the riskier 6...g5 is also common. } 7. O-O-O c6 8. e5 {It's likely
that this is premature. By holding back on this move and playing 8.f4 white
would have had better prospects. } 8... Nd5 9. f4 Bf5 10. Bd3 Bxd3 11. Nxd5
cxd5 12. Qxd3 Nc6 13. Be1 {Panov is over finessing. Simply 13.Nf3 was
better} 13... Qc7 14. Nf3 a5 15. Kb1 Rfc8 16. Rc1 e6 17. h4 dxe5 18. fxe5 Nb4
19. Qd2 Qc4 20. b3 Qb5 21. h5 g5 22. c3 {After this black trades Qs and gains
a positional advantage. He could have tried a K-side attack with the
interesting 22.Nxg5 hxg5 23.h6! (Not 23.Qxh5+ followed by h6 when black's
defensive resources should be adequate) 23...Bf8 29.Qxh5+ followed by Rh3 and
white has a winning attack. Black's best defense to 22.Nxg5 was to play
22...Rc7 and double Rs on the c-file. Even then white has excellent chances.
} 22... Qd3+ 23. Qxd3 Nxd3 24. Rc2 Rc6 25. Bd2 Rac8 {An even better plan
appears to be transferring the N to e4 with 25...Nf2-e4 followed by the
advance of the a-Pawn. } 26. Rf1 f6 {Kotov and Yudovich praised this as
shaking the foundations of white's position, but white's position, while
difficult, is hardly lost. } 27. exf6 Bxf6 28. g4 Kg7 29. a4 Rb6 {White's
position is becoming difficult because all of his pieces lack scope and black
is threatening to advance his b-Pawn. } 30. Ra2 Rxb3+ 31. Kc2 {At first glance
it seems as though black has been outwitted, but Simagin has planned for this.
} 31... Rbxc3+ 32. Bxc3 Nb4+ 33. Kb2 Nxa2 34. Bxa5 {It looks like black is
about to lose his N, but Simagin has prepared for this also. } 34... Rc4 35.
Be1 {After this white is lost thanks to Simagin's clever maneuver. After
35.Ra1 Nb4 36.Bxb4 it's hard to seen how black can force a win. } 35... Nc1
36. Bg3 Nd3+ {The N has slipped away and returned to its strong position on c3
and black's wins the d-Pawn. Very clever maneuvering by Simagin! } 37. Kb3
Bxd4 38. Nxd4 Rxd4 39. Kc3 Rxg4 40. Bd6 Nf4 {The N occupies another strong
square and at this point white is quite helpless. } 41. Re1 Rg3+ 42. Kc2 Rg2+
43. Kc3 d4+ 44. Kc4 {Craftier was 44.Kxd4 and if 44...Nxh5 45.Rxe6 Rg4+ 46.Ke4
offering the a-Pawn as bait. If black bites with 46...Rxa4?? white has a
perpetual with 47.Re7+ thanks to the N on h5 blocking the Ks escape. Black
can avoid all such monkeyshines with 46...Rf4 though} 44... Rc2+ 45. Kb3
{Capturing on d4 is out...after 45...Rd2+ white will lose his B. } 45... d3
46. Rd1 Re2 47. a5 e5 48. Rb1 Kf7 49. Ka3 Ke6 0-1
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Keres Barks Up The Wrong Tree
Zurich 1953, the Candidates Tournament for the 1954 World Championship is famous for the strength of the players and the high quality of the games.
Two well known books on it were written by David Bronstein and Miguel Najdorf. It later came out that Bronstein didn’t actually write "his" book, he only contributed analysis and everything else was written by Boris Vainshtein. I always preferred Najdorf’s book, but it’s rather harder to come by. There is also a scarce third book written in 1979 by National Master Jim Marfia of Michigan. Marfia’s typewritten book concentrates less on variations and more on verbal descriptions of what was happening in the games.
Smylov finished first and only suffered one defeat (to Kotov) which is an incredible feat given the strength of the tournament which contained the best 15 players in the world at the time.
Bronstein, Keres and Reshevsky tied for second. Bronstein suffered only two losses (to Geller and Szabo). Keres lost both of his games to Smyslov, one to Bronstein and one to Averbakh. His critical game against Smyslov in the 24th round is given here and it was also one of the most exciting. Reshevsky lost one game to Keres, both games to Smyslov and one game to Kotov.
The Keres - Smyslov game from round 24 demonstrates the danger of trying to force the issue by playing for a win instead of just playing the best moves. It also illustrates a point that was unknown to masters of the Romantic Era. In those days when offered a piece they took it, but sometimes it's best to just say no.
In this game, when Keres offered him a Rook, Smyslov pondered a long time and finally decided against accepting it. As a result, Keres paid a steep price. The game also illustrates the point that even two dangerous looking Rooks on the h-file may not constitute a sufficient attacking force if they are not backed up by other pieces.
This game was included in the book The World’s Greatest Chess Games by Burgess, Nunn and Emms where it received a rating of only 9 points out of a possible 15, meaning that while it was a great game, it did not receive high marks based on their criteria of quality and brilliance by both players, instructive value and historical significance.
Of the game itself, Keres wrote that it was an important game for him because if he had succeeded in winning he would have lead the tournament and felt he would then have had “every chance of emerging with final victory.” Consequently, he believed he should not have done as he had so often in the past and played so risky and “staked everything on one card.”
He offered Smyslov an extremely complicated piece sacrifice which, had it been accepted, would have subjected him to a very virulent attack. But, after long thought Smyslov declined, coolly defended and handed Keres what he (Keres) described as “an ignominious defeat” that not only threw away first place, but dropped him back to fourth place.
The game was played in the 24th round when Keres was a half point behind Smyslov. Keres was due for a bye in the next round. If they drew, Keres would either be a half point back or a full point depending on how Smyslov did in his 25th round game against Reshevsky.
This explains Keres’ decision of going for broke; he needed to win and so on move 19 he offered the Rook. By playing it safe, sidestepping the tactics and emphasizing his positional advantage, Smyslov forced his opponent to prove he could mate Smyslov’s King; he couldn’t and so lost a critical game. Against a lesser player, Keres' attack might have succeeded.
For the record, when Smyslov met Reshevsky in the next round (round 25), Reshevsky was a half point behind Smyslov with one more game to play. As a draw would not have helped Reshevsky, like Keres, he was forced to play for a win. Reshevsky was outplayed in a maneuvering game and so made a last ditch effort by introducing complications. But, Smyslov was careful, avoided all the danger and prevailed in the ending.
Two well known books on it were written by David Bronstein and Miguel Najdorf. It later came out that Bronstein didn’t actually write "his" book, he only contributed analysis and everything else was written by Boris Vainshtein. I always preferred Najdorf’s book, but it’s rather harder to come by. There is also a scarce third book written in 1979 by National Master Jim Marfia of Michigan. Marfia’s typewritten book concentrates less on variations and more on verbal descriptions of what was happening in the games.
Smylov finished first and only suffered one defeat (to Kotov) which is an incredible feat given the strength of the tournament which contained the best 15 players in the world at the time.
Bronstein, Keres and Reshevsky tied for second. Bronstein suffered only two losses (to Geller and Szabo). Keres lost both of his games to Smyslov, one to Bronstein and one to Averbakh. His critical game against Smyslov in the 24th round is given here and it was also one of the most exciting. Reshevsky lost one game to Keres, both games to Smyslov and one game to Kotov.
The Keres - Smyslov game from round 24 demonstrates the danger of trying to force the issue by playing for a win instead of just playing the best moves. It also illustrates a point that was unknown to masters of the Romantic Era. In those days when offered a piece they took it, but sometimes it's best to just say no.
In this game, when Keres offered him a Rook, Smyslov pondered a long time and finally decided against accepting it. As a result, Keres paid a steep price. The game also illustrates the point that even two dangerous looking Rooks on the h-file may not constitute a sufficient attacking force if they are not backed up by other pieces.
This game was included in the book The World’s Greatest Chess Games by Burgess, Nunn and Emms where it received a rating of only 9 points out of a possible 15, meaning that while it was a great game, it did not receive high marks based on their criteria of quality and brilliance by both players, instructive value and historical significance.
Of the game itself, Keres wrote that it was an important game for him because if he had succeeded in winning he would have lead the tournament and felt he would then have had “every chance of emerging with final victory.” Consequently, he believed he should not have done as he had so often in the past and played so risky and “staked everything on one card.”
He offered Smyslov an extremely complicated piece sacrifice which, had it been accepted, would have subjected him to a very virulent attack. But, after long thought Smyslov declined, coolly defended and handed Keres what he (Keres) described as “an ignominious defeat” that not only threw away first place, but dropped him back to fourth place.
The game was played in the 24th round when Keres was a half point behind Smyslov. Keres was due for a bye in the next round. If they drew, Keres would either be a half point back or a full point depending on how Smyslov did in his 25th round game against Reshevsky.
This explains Keres’ decision of going for broke; he needed to win and so on move 19 he offered the Rook. By playing it safe, sidestepping the tactics and emphasizing his positional advantage, Smyslov forced his opponent to prove he could mate Smyslov’s King; he couldn’t and so lost a critical game. Against a lesser player, Keres' attack might have succeeded.
For the record, when Smyslov met Reshevsky in the next round (round 25), Reshevsky was a half point behind Smyslov with one more game to play. As a draw would not have helped Reshevsky, like Keres, he was forced to play for a win. Reshevsky was outplayed in a maneuvering game and so made a last ditch effort by introducing complications. But, Smyslov was careful, avoided all the danger and prevailed in the ending.
[Event "Zurich Candidates"]
[Site "Zurich SUI"]
[Date "1953.10.13"]
[Round "24"]
[White "Paul Keres"]
[Black "Vasily Smyslov"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. e3 Be7 5. b3 O-O 6. Bb2 b6 7. d4 cxd4 8.
exd4 d5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Bb7 {A routine position and now white must decide
on a plan. In this type of position white hopes to use his B on the long
diagonal. Therefore black avoids capturing on c4 which might give white the
chance to play d5 opening up the Bs diagonal. } 11. Rc1 Rc8 12. Re1 Nb4 13.
Bf1 Ne4 14. a3 {White could play 14.Nxe4 and 15.Ne5 but he gains nothing
special.} 14... Nxc3 15. Rxc3 {Not 15.Bxc3 (removing the guard from the
a-Pawn) Na2 and after 16.Rc1 Nxc3 and ...Bxa3. } 15... Nc6 16. Ne5 {This turns
out to be a case of barking up the wrong tree. White would do better to play
on the Q-side with 16.c5 intending to utilize his Q-side P-majority. 18.Rh5
is the beginning of white's miseries. } 16... Nxe5 17. Rxe5 Bf6 18. Rh5
{Consistent as Keres continues his barking at the K-side. The threat is Rxh7
followed by Qh5+ and Rh3. However, retreating would give black a comfortable
position and pay against the isolated d-Pawn after 16...dxc4. Still, this was
probably white's best option.} 18... g6 {He could also have played at once
18...dxc4 19.Rxh7 and then 19...g6} 19. Rch3 {After this move Smyslov says he
thought for a long time and couldn't see a win for white if the R was taken,
but relied on his intuition that it was better not to take it. Theoretically
it was possible to take the offered R and survive, but practically his best
chance is to play as he did in the game and rely on his positional advantage.
Keres' only other choice was the retreat 19...Rhh3, but then the R is not well
placed and black would have a distinct advantage. } 19... dxc4 {Can he safely
take the R? In the book WGCG, Burgess indicates that he can with a lot of
analysis done with the help of Fritz 5 to support that hypothesis. 30 minutes
with Stockfish indicates that it would be an error for black to take the R.
After 19...gxh5? 20.Qxh5 Re8 21.a4! This surprising move allows the B go to a3
cutting off the escape route of black's K. If black prevents this with
21...Qd6 then 22.Qh6 will win. 22...Bg7 23.Qh7+ followed by 24.Rg3. The
beauty of Smyslov's move is that it 1) opens up the diagonal of the light
squared o it can go to the defense of the K is need be 2) puts pressure on the
d-Pawn and 3) threatens ...c3 closing the diagonal of white' dangerous B on
b2. } 20. Rxh7 {All the annotators mention the possibility of 20.Qg4 claiming
that Keres would have had drawing possibilities. But that, too, turns out to
be a dead end. 20...c3 21.Bxc3 Qd6!! All the annotators give 21...Rxc3
22.Rxc3 Qxd4. The genius of Stockfish gives us 21...Qd6 and black controls
the center and open c-file which in the long run gives gives him all the
winning chances. Still, 20.Qg4 was far better than chucking the R. } 20...
c3 {Simply brilliant. White can't avoid the collapse of his center and
black's growing play on the Q-side. } 21. Qc1 {Obviously if 21.Bxc3 Rxc3!
22.Rxc3 Kh7 and white doesn't have any pieces left to attack the K, not to
mention he is a piece down. } 21... Qxd4 {A must play move. Keres must have
been fervently hoping for 21...cxb2?? when 22.Qh6 leads to mate. } 22. Qh6
{Threatening mate on h7 after he sacrifices the R that's sitting on that
square. } 22... Rfd8 {Making an escape square. } 23. Bc1 Bg7 24. Qg5 {The
smoke has cleared and white is only a P down, but his pieces are useless
against black's counterattack. } 24... Qf6 25. Qg4 c2 26. Be2 Rd4 27. f4 Rd1+
28. Bxd1 Qd4+ {It's mate in 8 moves. Brilliant defense by Smyslov.} 0-1
[Site "Zurich SUI"]
[Date "1953.10.13"]
[Round "24"]
[White "Paul Keres"]
[Black "Vasily Smyslov"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 c5 4. e3 Be7 5. b3 O-O 6. Bb2 b6 7. d4 cxd4 8.
exd4 d5 9. Bd3 Nc6 10. O-O Bb7 {A routine position and now white must decide
on a plan. In this type of position white hopes to use his B on the long
diagonal. Therefore black avoids capturing on c4 which might give white the
chance to play d5 opening up the Bs diagonal. } 11. Rc1 Rc8 12. Re1 Nb4 13.
Bf1 Ne4 14. a3 {White could play 14.Nxe4 and 15.Ne5 but he gains nothing
special.} 14... Nxc3 15. Rxc3 {Not 15.Bxc3 (removing the guard from the
a-Pawn) Na2 and after 16.Rc1 Nxc3 and ...Bxa3. } 15... Nc6 16. Ne5 {This turns
out to be a case of barking up the wrong tree. White would do better to play
on the Q-side with 16.c5 intending to utilize his Q-side P-majority. 18.Rh5
is the beginning of white's miseries. } 16... Nxe5 17. Rxe5 Bf6 18. Rh5
{Consistent as Keres continues his barking at the K-side. The threat is Rxh7
followed by Qh5+ and Rh3. However, retreating would give black a comfortable
position and pay against the isolated d-Pawn after 16...dxc4. Still, this was
probably white's best option.} 18... g6 {He could also have played at once
18...dxc4 19.Rxh7 and then 19...g6} 19. Rch3 {After this move Smyslov says he
thought for a long time and couldn't see a win for white if the R was taken,
but relied on his intuition that it was better not to take it. Theoretically
it was possible to take the offered R and survive, but practically his best
chance is to play as he did in the game and rely on his positional advantage.
Keres' only other choice was the retreat 19...Rhh3, but then the R is not well
placed and black would have a distinct advantage. } 19... dxc4 {Can he safely
take the R? In the book WGCG, Burgess indicates that he can with a lot of
analysis done with the help of Fritz 5 to support that hypothesis. 30 minutes
with Stockfish indicates that it would be an error for black to take the R.
After 19...gxh5? 20.Qxh5 Re8 21.a4! This surprising move allows the B go to a3
cutting off the escape route of black's K. If black prevents this with
21...Qd6 then 22.Qh6 will win. 22...Bg7 23.Qh7+ followed by 24.Rg3. The
beauty of Smyslov's move is that it 1) opens up the diagonal of the light
squared o it can go to the defense of the K is need be 2) puts pressure on the
d-Pawn and 3) threatens ...c3 closing the diagonal of white' dangerous B on
b2. } 20. Rxh7 {All the annotators mention the possibility of 20.Qg4 claiming
that Keres would have had drawing possibilities. But that, too, turns out to
be a dead end. 20...c3 21.Bxc3 Qd6!! All the annotators give 21...Rxc3
22.Rxc3 Qxd4. The genius of Stockfish gives us 21...Qd6 and black controls
the center and open c-file which in the long run gives gives him all the
winning chances. Still, 20.Qg4 was far better than chucking the R. } 20...
c3 {Simply brilliant. White can't avoid the collapse of his center and
black's growing play on the Q-side. } 21. Qc1 {Obviously if 21.Bxc3 Rxc3!
22.Rxc3 Kh7 and white doesn't have any pieces left to attack the K, not to
mention he is a piece down. } 21... Qxd4 {A must play move. Keres must have
been fervently hoping for 21...cxb2?? when 22.Qh6 leads to mate. } 22. Qh6
{Threatening mate on h7 after he sacrifices the R that's sitting on that
square. } 22... Rfd8 {Making an escape square. } 23. Bc1 Bg7 24. Qg5 {The
smoke has cleared and white is only a P down, but his pieces are useless
against black's counterattack. } 24... Qf6 25. Qg4 c2 26. Be2 Rd4 27. f4 Rd1+
28. Bxd1 Qd4+ {It's mate in 8 moves. Brilliant defense by Smyslov.} 0-1
Monday, February 25, 2019
Pierre Saint-Amant
Saint-Amant |
Saint-Amant may or may not have been the first unofficial world champion. He refused a match against Jozsef Szen (1805- 1857) of Hungary who was one of world's top ten players for most of his playing career. He also never played the Russian Alexander Petrov (1794 – 1867), the first great Russian master.
He lost a match to John Cochrane (1798 – 1878), the leading Scottish master, in 1842 by a score of +4 -6 =1). Cochrane spent a long tour of duty in India and when he returned to the UK and beat everyone except Howard Staunton. Cochrane also helped Staunton prepare for his match against Saint-Amant, which established Staunton as the world's leading player.
In 1843 Howard Staunton was considered the strongest player in England and he and Saint-Amant played a match in London which was won by Saint Amant (+3 -2 =1). A second match was payed in November at the Cafe de la Regence which was won by Staunton who scored +11 -6 =4. His victory lead to the popular opinion that he was the strongest player in the world.
Saint-Amant became a government clerk in Paris and eventually served as the secretary to the governor of French Guiana from 1819 to 1821 and was fired after he protested against the slave trade that existed in that colony.
Next he worked as a journalist and actor before becoming a successful wine merchant. He was a captain in the French National Guard during the 1848 revolution. The French militia which existed from 1789 until 1872 was separate from the French Army and existed both for policing and as a military reserve.
The Tuileries Palace was a royal and imperial palace in Paris which stood on the right bank of the River Seine. It was the usual Parisian residence of most French monarchs, from Henry IV to Napoleon III, until it was burned by the Paris Commune in 1871. Saint-Amant played a big role in saving it from being burned by a mob ans as a reward was made its Governor for a few months.
His Travels to California in 1850-1851, published in Paris in 1854, described his sailing on the Atlantic, crossing the Isthmus of Panama, sailing the Pacific and arrival in San Francisco. While serving as a diplomat in California he visited Oregon and his map of the Oregon Territory is scarce today, but at the time was considered the most comprehensive and important work son California published in French. He appears to have played no chess while in California, or if he did, no games survive.
Saint-Amant's map |
After his stay in California, he started his long journey home. Most likely he returned the same way he came, by ship and crossing the Isthmus of Panama, a journey that normally took 6 weeks or more. If he went around Cape Horn travel time was usually 6-7 months. That’s amazing today. It’s somewhat less than 2,600 from San Francisco to New York and you can fly it in less than 5 hours today. Even on Amtrak the train trip takes about 67 hours, including a 5 hour layover in Chicago. He arrived in New York in the fall of 1852.
While in New York he drew a match against Charles Stanley (1819 – 1901), an Englishman who emigrated from London to New York in 1845 to work in the British Consulate. At the time Cochrane was the US Champion and the match was tied 4-4 with no draws.
Saint-Amant was back in Paris in 1858 when Paul Morphy made his first visit to France. He admitted that Morphy was the better player. They played some private games, only one game, which Morphy won, has been recorded and preserved. It was a consultation game in which Saint-Amant had a partner.
In 1861 Saint-Amant retired to Algeria and died there in 1872 after being thrown from his carriage. He died the day of the accident at his chateau near Algiers; he was 73 years old. A magazine of the day described him as a man of simple and modest nature combined with a great deal of varied learning and a wise and enlightened administrator. He was buried in the Cemetery of Birmandries in Algeria.
It’s difficult to to judge how good Saint-Amant really was by today’s standards, but Chessmetrics puts his rating between the years 1843 and 1846 in the mid-2500s placing him just behind Howard Staunton who was rated about 100 point higher.
His opponent in the following game was George Walker (1802 – 1879). Walker was an author and chess organizer who did a great deal to promote chess. He founded both the Westminster Chess Club in 1831 and the St. Georges Club in 1834 and as an author wrote about the game in his chess columns in The Lancet and Bell's Life.
The Lancet, founded in 1823, is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal that is among the world's oldest, most prestigious, and best known general medical journals.
Bell's Life was founded in London in 1822 and was a weekly 4-page sheet containing general news and sports, but gravitated mainly to sports in later years. It initially made its reputation covering prize-fighting but became known for reliable coverage of a range of sports such as cricket, angling, sailing and even chess. However, it was particularly known for its reports on horse-racing, publishing up to date information on schedules and results. Today it is best known as a racing paper.
[Event "London"]
[Site "London"]
[Date "1836.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "George Walker"]
[Black "Pierre Saint-Amant"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 e5 2. c3 {This opening in known as the MacLeod Attack (or sometimes the
Lopez Opening) named after the 19th century Scottish–Canadian master Nicholas
MacLeod who play it frequently. It has little to recommend for it. White
prepares d2-d4, establishing a strong center. It can transpose to other
openings like the Ponziani or the Goring Gambit in the Scotch Game. Eric
Schiller states in Unorthodox Chess Openings that it is too slow because black
can respond vigorously with 2...d5! to eliminate transpositional possibilities
and solve all of his opening problems. } 2... d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 {4.Nc3 is not
available to chase the Q away and gain a tempo, so theoretically black already
has a slight advantage} 4. Nf3 Bc5 {Pointless is 4...e5 because after 5.Nd4
the N can find a haven on b3 or if 5...Nc6 then simply 6.Nxc6. The text
however is not good. Black's best is to develop normally with 4...Nc6 and if
5.d4 then simply 5...Nf6. 5.b3 Poor play. The whole point of his opening was
to play d4 and so after 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ white has equalized. } 5. b3
Bg4 6. Be2 e4 7. Nd4 {White has no really decent move. Whatever he does black
will have a slight advantage. White's real problem is that his position
suggests no reasonable plan of attack. } 7... Bxe2 8. Nxe2 Nc6 9. O-O Ne5
{Having established a dominating center and a lead in development black should
simply continue development with 9...Nf6 or even 9...O-O-O. } 10. Nf4 Qd6 11.
d4 {This costs a P, but he has to do something to get his pieces into play. }
11... exd3 12. Re1 O-O-O {Neither side seems to e aware of the real weakness
in white's position, namely f2. Hence, white's best move was the miserable
13.Nh3. } 13. Nd2 f5 {Preventing Ne4. } 14. a4 {Opening himself up to a
winning attack by black, but Saint-Amant also missed the opportunity this move
presents him with. White's position is horrible, but relatively best was
14.Nh3. } 14... a5 {Winning easily is 14...Bxf2+ and if 15.Kf2 Ng4+ regains
the piece and leaves white dead lost. } 15. b4 axb4 {15...Bxf2+ is still a
winner.} 16. cxb4 Bd4 {At the risk of repeating myself 16...Bxf2+ is winning.
} 17. Rb1 Nf6 {Guess what move lack should have played. If you guessed
17...Bxf2+ give yourself 5 points. } 18. Nb3 Nfg4 19. Nxd4 {Eliminating the
...Bxf2+ threat. Not that it matters a whole lot because black is still
winning. } 19... Qxd4 20. Be3 Qd6 21. Bc5 Qh6 22. Nh3 Rhe8 23. a5 {White has
nothing better than this feeble attacking gesture. } 23... d2 24. Rf1 Nd3 25.
a6 bxa6 26. Qf3 Re4 27. Qxf5+ Qe6 28. Qxe6+ Rxe6 {Even with the Qs gone black
still has a virulent attack. } 29. Ng5 {29.Be3 does not help because after
29...Rxe3 and 30...Nxe3+ black is winning. } 29... Re1 30. Be3 Nxe3 {Stockfish
saw a mate in 19 with 30...Nc1. } 31. fxe3 Rxf1+ {There's a mate in 14 with
31...Nc1.} 32. Kxf1 Nc1 {It's mate in 14 moves. } 0-1
[Site "London"]
[Date "1836.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "George Walker"]
[Black "Pierre Saint-Amant"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 e5 2. c3 {This opening in known as the MacLeod Attack (or sometimes the
Lopez Opening) named after the 19th century Scottish–Canadian master Nicholas
MacLeod who play it frequently. It has little to recommend for it. White
prepares d2-d4, establishing a strong center. It can transpose to other
openings like the Ponziani or the Goring Gambit in the Scotch Game. Eric
Schiller states in Unorthodox Chess Openings that it is too slow because black
can respond vigorously with 2...d5! to eliminate transpositional possibilities
and solve all of his opening problems. } 2... d5 3. exd5 Qxd5 {4.Nc3 is not
available to chase the Q away and gain a tempo, so theoretically black already
has a slight advantage} 4. Nf3 Bc5 {Pointless is 4...e5 because after 5.Nd4
the N can find a haven on b3 or if 5...Nc6 then simply 6.Nxc6. The text
however is not good. Black's best is to develop normally with 4...Nc6 and if
5.d4 then simply 5...Nf6. 5.b3 Poor play. The whole point of his opening was
to play d4 and so after 5.d4 exd4 6.cxd4 Bb4+ white has equalized. } 5. b3
Bg4 6. Be2 e4 7. Nd4 {White has no really decent move. Whatever he does black
will have a slight advantage. White's real problem is that his position
suggests no reasonable plan of attack. } 7... Bxe2 8. Nxe2 Nc6 9. O-O Ne5
{Having established a dominating center and a lead in development black should
simply continue development with 9...Nf6 or even 9...O-O-O. } 10. Nf4 Qd6 11.
d4 {This costs a P, but he has to do something to get his pieces into play. }
11... exd3 12. Re1 O-O-O {Neither side seems to e aware of the real weakness
in white's position, namely f2. Hence, white's best move was the miserable
13.Nh3. } 13. Nd2 f5 {Preventing Ne4. } 14. a4 {Opening himself up to a
winning attack by black, but Saint-Amant also missed the opportunity this move
presents him with. White's position is horrible, but relatively best was
14.Nh3. } 14... a5 {Winning easily is 14...Bxf2+ and if 15.Kf2 Ng4+ regains
the piece and leaves white dead lost. } 15. b4 axb4 {15...Bxf2+ is still a
winner.} 16. cxb4 Bd4 {At the risk of repeating myself 16...Bxf2+ is winning.
} 17. Rb1 Nf6 {Guess what move lack should have played. If you guessed
17...Bxf2+ give yourself 5 points. } 18. Nb3 Nfg4 19. Nxd4 {Eliminating the
...Bxf2+ threat. Not that it matters a whole lot because black is still
winning. } 19... Qxd4 20. Be3 Qd6 21. Bc5 Qh6 22. Nh3 Rhe8 23. a5 {White has
nothing better than this feeble attacking gesture. } 23... d2 24. Rf1 Nd3 25.
a6 bxa6 26. Qf3 Re4 27. Qxf5+ Qe6 28. Qxe6+ Rxe6 {Even with the Qs gone black
still has a virulent attack. } 29. Ng5 {29.Be3 does not help because after
29...Rxe3 and 30...Nxe3+ black is winning. } 29... Re1 30. Be3 Nxe3 {Stockfish
saw a mate in 19 with 30...Nc1. } 31. fxe3 Rxf1+ {There's a mate in 14 with
31...Nc1.} 32. Kxf1 Nc1 {It's mate in 14 moves. } 0-1
Saturday, February 23, 2019
Frank Parr's Immortal Game
Like all chess players, British master Frank Parr (December 17, 1918 – December 28, 2003) had his immortal game. He was British Boys’ Champion in 1953 and when you look at the list of Hastings winners you’ll see some of the truly great names in the history of chess: Rubinstein, Euwe, Tartakower, Alekhine, Marshall, Capablanca, Flohr, Fine, Reshevsky, Szabo, Keres, Korchnoi, Gligoric, Tal, Spassky, Larsen and Bronstein, just to name a few.
The list of winners also contains the name of Frank Parr who won the 1939-40 tournament. It was the last tournament to be played at Hastings until after the war and it wasn’t very strong because most of the strongest British players were stranded in Buenos Aires after the Olympiad. The result was that the annual Hastings tournament ended up being a national event. Parr was drafted in 1939 and was playing in uniform. This was his only Hastings Premier appearance although he played in many Challengers' sections up to 2002/3.
Parr was the British correspondence chess champion in 1948 (with Gabriel Wood), 1949 (with H. Israel) and won it outright in 1950 and 1956. Parr played in 25 British Chess Championships from 1936 to 1991 with his best result being in 1956 when he scored a draw and a loss in the first two rounds then won eight games in a row before drawing in the last round to finish with a 9-3 score. Unfortunately, that was only good enough to finish in second place a half point behind C.H.O’D. Alexander even though he beat Alexander in their individual game.
Before retirement he worked as a messenger at the London Stock Exchange and beside chess his main hobby was gardening, football (soccer) and cricket. After a long illness Parr died on the opening day of the Hastings International Congress. In Parr’s memory the British Federation for Correspondence Chess introduced a Frank Parr Memorial Tournament in 2005. Held alongside it was the David Parr Memorial, dedicated to Frank's eldest son, another fine chess player who also died in 2003.
Known for his aggressive style and alertness to tactical possibilities, the below game captured the attention of the chess world and he annotated it for an issue of British Chess Magazine. He even had a tapestry made up of one of the game's key positions, which he hung on the wall of his living room. Reinfeld and Chernev, in their Fireside Book of Chess, stated that in their opinion the game could considered the finest attacking game of all time.
Parr’s play in the game was, as far as I can tell, above reproach. After gaining an advantage out of the opening he whips up an attack seemingly out of nowhere. This was Parr’s immortal game.
His opponent was George Wheatcroft (October 9, 1905 – December 2, 1987). Wheatcroft was British Correspondence Champion in 1935 and a strong blindfold player. He was President of the BCF from 1953 to 1956. Educated at New College, Oxford, he was Professor of English Law and acknowledged as a standard authority on tax law.
[Event "City Of London CC Championship"]
[Site "London ENG"]
[Date "1938.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Frank Parr"]
[Black "George Wheatcroft"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Nc3 Nxc3 7. bxc3 c5 8.
e3 O-O 9. Ne2 Nc6 10. O-O cxd4 11. cxd4 e5 {This gives white the initiative.
Better was 11...Be6. } 12. d5 {Excellent...now white's pieces have free reign.
} 12... Ne7 {Too passive. For better or worse he had to play 12...Na5. } 13.
Ba3 Re8 14. Nc3 Qa5 15. Qb3 e4 16. Nxe4 Nxd5 17. Rac1 {Notice how white's
pieces have lots of freedom while black's are quite limited. } 17... Be6 18.
Rc5 Qb6 19. Rb5 Qa6 {It's difficult to see the fault with this move, but Parr
immediately pounces on the error. His best chance was 19...Nxe3 as he played
next move, but then it's a move too late. } 20. Nc5 Nxe3 21. Nxe6 {If black
had played 19...Nxe3 white would not have had this move available. It would be
bad to take the Q because after 21.Nxa6 Bxb3 22.fxe3 Bc4 white's advantage has
disappeared. } 21... Nxf1 22. Ng5 Nd2 {At first glance it appears that black,
having won the exchange, is doing OK, but Parr can now whip up a decisive
attack. } 23. Qxf7+ Kh8 24. Bd5 {Do you see the threat? White threatens Qg8+
and Nf7 mate.} 24... h6 25. Bb2 {Again threatening mate and the B is immune
because of Qh7 mate. } 25... Rg8 26. Qd7 Qa4 27. Bb3 {Equally good was 27.Nf7+
at once. } 27... Nxb3 {Now white has a mate in 6 moves. } 28. Nf7+ Kh7 29.
Rh5 {Stunning! } 29... Qa5 30. Rxh6+ {If 30...Bxh6 31.Ng5 mate. } 1-0
[Site "London ENG"]
[Date "1938.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Frank Parr"]
[Black "George Wheatcroft"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. g3 Bg7 4. Bg2 d5 5. cxd5 Nxd5 6. Nc3 Nxc3 7. bxc3 c5 8.
e3 O-O 9. Ne2 Nc6 10. O-O cxd4 11. cxd4 e5 {This gives white the initiative.
Better was 11...Be6. } 12. d5 {Excellent...now white's pieces have free reign.
} 12... Ne7 {Too passive. For better or worse he had to play 12...Na5. } 13.
Ba3 Re8 14. Nc3 Qa5 15. Qb3 e4 16. Nxe4 Nxd5 17. Rac1 {Notice how white's
pieces have lots of freedom while black's are quite limited. } 17... Be6 18.
Rc5 Qb6 19. Rb5 Qa6 {It's difficult to see the fault with this move, but Parr
immediately pounces on the error. His best chance was 19...Nxe3 as he played
next move, but then it's a move too late. } 20. Nc5 Nxe3 21. Nxe6 {If black
had played 19...Nxe3 white would not have had this move available. It would be
bad to take the Q because after 21.Nxa6 Bxb3 22.fxe3 Bc4 white's advantage has
disappeared. } 21... Nxf1 22. Ng5 Nd2 {At first glance it appears that black,
having won the exchange, is doing OK, but Parr can now whip up a decisive
attack. } 23. Qxf7+ Kh8 24. Bd5 {Do you see the threat? White threatens Qg8+
and Nf7 mate.} 24... h6 25. Bb2 {Again threatening mate and the B is immune
because of Qh7 mate. } 25... Rg8 26. Qd7 Qa4 27. Bb3 {Equally good was 27.Nf7+
at once. } 27... Nxb3 {Now white has a mate in 6 moves. } 28. Nf7+ Kh7 29.
Rh5 {Stunning! } 29... Qa5 30. Rxh6+ {If 30...Bxh6 31.Ng5 mate. } 1-0
Friday, February 22, 2019
DogEared Games
I received a request from DogEared Games, developers of strategically colorful games, asking if I would mention them on this blog.
According to the site it is traditional chess variant using a colored board. Each player gets two parts to their turn; in the first part, they must finish their move on whichever color their opponent last moved to. In the second part, they must move a different piece and finish on a different color, which their opponent must then copy.
It won a 'Family and Education' award from Imagination Gaming, was nominated for an award from Mensa in Deutschland and the 2nd World Championships will be held as part of the Mind Sports Olympiad in London in August. It is available as a free download as a mobile app.
In addition to a website, the have a Facebook page and are on Youtube. If you enjoy chess variants or are looking for something different then you might want to check them out.
According to the site it is traditional chess variant using a colored board. Each player gets two parts to their turn; in the first part, they must finish their move on whichever color their opponent last moved to. In the second part, they must move a different piece and finish on a different color, which their opponent must then copy.
It won a 'Family and Education' award from Imagination Gaming, was nominated for an award from Mensa in Deutschland and the 2nd World Championships will be held as part of the Mind Sports Olympiad in London in August. It is available as a free download as a mobile app.
In addition to a website, the have a Facebook page and are on Youtube. If you enjoy chess variants or are looking for something different then you might want to check them out.
Thursday, February 21, 2019
The Tartajubow Chess Clock
The Tartajubow chess clock |
Sometime in the late 1950s I wrote a letter to the chess columnist of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, David Robb, asking for information on where to buy books and equipment and he referred me to the USCF. Robb was mentioned in a 1956 issue of Chess magazine as being the editor of "one of America's greatest chess columns." Today you can't find any information on him.
I do remember finding a real set at the Ben Franklin Five and Dime (aka “the dime store”). To see an incredible array of stuff they offer visit the website of the store in Oberlin, Ohio, venue of the 1975 US Championship. The set had a three inch King and the pieces were hollow and light as a feather. After filling them with plaster of Paris and gluing felt on the bottom they were usable though.
After reading about chess clocks somewhere, I constructed my own using an Erector set, two old alarm clocks and a wooden dowel. The clock didn’t have flags, but the rule was that if a white space was visible between the minute hand and the 12 o’clock mark the time limit had been exceeded.
The closest thing on the market with a similar start/stop push rod was the Sutton Coldfield by the publisher of Chess Magazine, B.H.Wood. As you can see, it was push lever action and is composed of two alarm clocks.
Sutton Coldfield |
My clock wasn’t nearly as beautiful as this Dutch Koopman clock, but for me and a couple of friends, it served the purpose. The Koopmans were produced in Dordrecht from the 1940s till the end of the 1990s.
the Koopman |
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
Mateusz Bartel Scores a Knockout
via GIPHY
In the following game black takes too many chances and white executes a typical N-sac in the Sicilian that gives him a lasting attack. However, black fights back into the game only to miss his opportunity in a mutual time scramble and the result was a nail-biting finish.
The game was played in the 2015 European Individual Championship. The event was the sixteenth in the annual series of European continental championships that were first staged in 2000. The top 23 places qualified for the World Cup 2015 and 250 players competed. This event, an 11 round Swiss, was held February 24 to March 8 in the Jerusalem Ramada Hotel in Israel.
Round one saw nearly half of the top boards drawn and in round 2 over half the top twenty boards were drawn. After three rounds five players had 3-0 scores while 37 players had 2.5.
After round four only Anton Korobov had 4-0 and maintained the lead until he lost to Nepomniachtchi in round 6 which dropped him back into a tie for fifth. Nepomniachtchi’s win tied him for first with 5.0 with Bartel, Sargissian and Motylev.
By round 7 there was a nine-way for first and a pack of 21 players were a half point back. In round 8 Nepomniachtchi defeated David Howell to take the sole lead with 6.5-1.5.
In round 9 Nepomniachtchi lost the lead when he was defeated by Navara, who was joined in the lead by Evgeniy Najer and Anton Korobov with scores of 7.0-2.0. Eleven players were half point behind them.
In round ten, Najer moved into the sole lead when he beat Korobov. In the last round Najer took the event with outright first place after he drew his game with Khismatullin. The top scores were:
1) Evgeny Najer 8.5-2.5
2-4) David Navara, Mateusz Bartel and Denis Khismatullin 8.0-3.0
There were 22 players with 7.5-3.5. Nepomniachtchi finished with 7.0-4.0.
[Event "European Individual Championship"]
[Site "Jerusalem ISR"]
[Date "2015.3.8"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mateusz Bartel"]
[Black "Ian Nepomniachtchi"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Nc6 4. O-O Bd7 5. Re1 a6 6. Bxc6 Bxc6 7. d4 cxd4
{Better is 5...Nf6. } 8. Nxd4 Bd7 {Better was 8...Nf6 as played in
Adams-Topalov, Frankfurt 2000. Or even 8...e6 as is Hua-Movsesian, in a game
played on ICC back in 2006. } 9. Bg5 Nf6 10. Bxf6 {White has given up the two
Bs in exchange for a badly weakened black Ks position. } 10... gxf6 11. Nc3
e6 12. Qh5 {White has already established a very promising position. Where
can black's King go and be safe? The answer is nowhere. The K-side is too
dangerous and this attack on f7 rules out castling Q-side. And. everybody
knows it's dangerous to leave the K in the center. } 12... Bg7 13. Rad1 Rc8
{For better or worse black had to risk castling with 13...O-O. The reason is
that now black's R on h8 is going to become useless. } 14. Nf5 exf5 {11...O-O
12.Nxg7 Kxg7 16.Rd3 and this R-lift leaves black lost.} 15. exf5+ Kf8 16. Ne4
Bc6 17. Nxd6 Qc7 18. Nxc8 Qxc8 19. Rd4 {Black is already lost. Stockfish
evaluates this position a being over six Ps in white's favor! } 19... Qc7 20.
Qd1 Bh6 21. h4 {What a great move! This wins material because of the threat of
22.Rd8+ Kg7 and 23. Qg4+ which can only be met by 23...Bg5. } 21... Qa5 22.
Rd8+ Kg7 23. Qg4+ Bg5 24. Rdd1 h6 25. a3 Qc7 26. Qg3 {Equally good was 26.Re3
and 27.Rg3, but white is willing to trade Qs which leaves him with an easy
win. } 26... Qa5 27. f4 {This turns out to be dubious as it allows black an
ingenious try at saving the game. Safer was either 27.Qg4 or 27.Qh3.} 27...
Qc5+ 28. Re3 Bxg2 {A brilliant try! If 29.Kxg2 Qxc2+ which picks up the R on
d1 or if 29.Qxg2 lack snags the R on e3. In either case black would be
winning. } 29. fxg5 hxg5 30. hxg5 Rh1+ {This loses instantly. Tougher
resistance could be put up with 30...Be4! but after 31.gxf6+ Kxf6 32.Qd6+
white should eventually win, but black is certainly not without drawing
chances. } 31. Kxg2 Qc6+ 32. Rf3 Rxd1 33. gxf6+ Kxf6 34. Qh4+ Kg7 35. f6+
{Black's K is caught in a mating net. } 35... Kg8 36. Qg3+ Kf8 37. Qb8+ Qe8
38. Rh3 {The knockout punch. } 38... Rd2+ 39. Kf3 1-0
[Site "Jerusalem ISR"]
[Date "2015.3.8"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Mateusz Bartel"]
[Black "Ian Nepomniachtchi"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bb5+ Nc6 4. O-O Bd7 5. Re1 a6 6. Bxc6 Bxc6 7. d4 cxd4
{Better is 5...Nf6. } 8. Nxd4 Bd7 {Better was 8...Nf6 as played in
Adams-Topalov, Frankfurt 2000. Or even 8...e6 as is Hua-Movsesian, in a game
played on ICC back in 2006. } 9. Bg5 Nf6 10. Bxf6 {White has given up the two
Bs in exchange for a badly weakened black Ks position. } 10... gxf6 11. Nc3
e6 12. Qh5 {White has already established a very promising position. Where
can black's King go and be safe? The answer is nowhere. The K-side is too
dangerous and this attack on f7 rules out castling Q-side. And. everybody
knows it's dangerous to leave the K in the center. } 12... Bg7 13. Rad1 Rc8
{For better or worse black had to risk castling with 13...O-O. The reason is
that now black's R on h8 is going to become useless. } 14. Nf5 exf5 {11...O-O
12.Nxg7 Kxg7 16.Rd3 and this R-lift leaves black lost.} 15. exf5+ Kf8 16. Ne4
Bc6 17. Nxd6 Qc7 18. Nxc8 Qxc8 19. Rd4 {Black is already lost. Stockfish
evaluates this position a being over six Ps in white's favor! } 19... Qc7 20.
Qd1 Bh6 21. h4 {What a great move! This wins material because of the threat of
22.Rd8+ Kg7 and 23. Qg4+ which can only be met by 23...Bg5. } 21... Qa5 22.
Rd8+ Kg7 23. Qg4+ Bg5 24. Rdd1 h6 25. a3 Qc7 26. Qg3 {Equally good was 26.Re3
and 27.Rg3, but white is willing to trade Qs which leaves him with an easy
win. } 26... Qa5 27. f4 {This turns out to be dubious as it allows black an
ingenious try at saving the game. Safer was either 27.Qg4 or 27.Qh3.} 27...
Qc5+ 28. Re3 Bxg2 {A brilliant try! If 29.Kxg2 Qxc2+ which picks up the R on
d1 or if 29.Qxg2 lack snags the R on e3. In either case black would be
winning. } 29. fxg5 hxg5 30. hxg5 Rh1+ {This loses instantly. Tougher
resistance could be put up with 30...Be4! but after 31.gxf6+ Kxf6 32.Qd6+
white should eventually win, but black is certainly not without drawing
chances. } 31. Kxg2 Qc6+ 32. Rf3 Rxd1 33. gxf6+ Kxf6 34. Qh4+ Kg7 35. f6+
{Black's K is caught in a mating net. } 35... Kg8 36. Qg3+ Kf8 37. Qb8+ Qe8
38. Rh3 {The knockout punch. } 38... Rd2+ 39. Kf3 1-0
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Victor Soultanbeieff
Victor Soultanbeieff (November 11, 1895 – February 9, 1972) was born in the Ukraine and though he learned to play chess rather late into his teens, his improvement was rapid and he became known as a brilliant attacking player.
In 1914 he won the city championship of Yekaterinoslav, his home town, but soon found himself spending three years in the trenches in World War I. After the war was over he again won the city championship in 1918. Then came the Russian Revolution and he was back in the army serving in the Imperial Russian Army under the commanding general of the anti-Bolshevik White Army in Southern Russia, General Pyotr Wrangel.
After his side lost the civil war in 1920, Wrangel, who had lost half of his standing army, organized a mass evacuation on the shores of the Black Sea and gave every officer, soldier, and civilian the choice to evacuate and go with him into the unknown, or remain in Russia and face the wrath of the Red Army. The White forces evacuated from the Crimea in 1920 in remnants of the Russian Imperial Navy that became known as Wrangel's fleet. And, that’s how Soultanbeieff ended up in Gallipoli in southern Italy.
At the end of 1921 he sought asylum in Belgium and after a short stay in Brussels he moved to Liege, where he would stay for the rest of his life. In civilian life he became an industrial chemist.
In 1923 he participated for the first time in the Belgian Chess Championship and finished 4eth, but impressed everyone with his play. He would go on to play in 22 Belgian championships and win it five times: 1932 tied with Dyner, 1934, 1943, 1957, and 1961.
As he had to combine chess with his work, his international play was limited. He became a national master in 1931 and International Arbiter in 1964. Soultanbeieff played a few short matches, drawing a match against Arthur Dunkelblum in 1932 and George Koltanowski in 1935. In 1946 he lost a match to Paul Devos.
Soultanbeieff was a gifted correspondence player, but here too he did not devote much time to the endeavor. He started playing in correspondence tournaments when he was still in Russia and played 1st board for Belgium in the first correspondence chess Olympiad, scoring 3 points out of six. Another notable result was a drawn match against Aleksandras Machtas, future champion of Lithuania.
Soultanbeieff also wrote a chess column for various local newspapers and collaborated with many outstanding chess periodicals like Shakmati Listock (later Shakhmaty v SSSR), l'Échiquier Belge and Échec et Mat. He wrote a book on the world championship match between Capablanca and Alekhine. He also commented the games of the Ostend 1936 tournament for the tournament book and published a collection of his own games under the title Guide pratique du jeu des combinaisons, which was later reprinted as le Maître de l'attaque. Chessmetrics estimates his rating in the mid-1930s to have been in the mid-2400s.
One of Soultanbeieff's best known games is probably the one he played against Defosse given in the Chandler Cornered article HERE.
His opponent, Arthur Dunkelblum (23 April 1906 – 27 January 1979,) was a Polish-born Belgian chess master. Arthur Dunkelblum was born in Cracow (Kraków-Podgórze), Austria-Hungary. He played for Belgium in eleven Chess Olympiads: 1928, 1933, 1937, 1950, 1954, 1956, 1958, 1960, 1962, 1966, and 1968. He had good results in minor European tournaments, but never managed to win the Belgian championship.
Dunkleblum |
Dunkelblum is frequently given as the name of the player who lost two of the most frequently published games featuring George Koltanowski...see Edward Winter’s post.
The following game was played in the Belgian resort of Spa which is 22 miles southeast of Liege and is one of Belgium's main tourist cities famous for its several natural mineral springs. Marcel Barzin of Belgium actually played under his pseudonym of Varlin. Soultanbeieff (Russia), Sapira (Romania) and Dunkelblum (Poland) were all immigrants.
1-2) Fritz Saemisch and Sir George Thomas 8.5
3) Emanuel Sapira 8.0
4) Savielly Tartakower 7.0
5-7) Arthur Dunkelblum, Massimiliano Romih, Massimiliano and Victor Soultanbeieff 6.0
8) Jacques Davidson 5.0
9) Georges Koltanowski 4.5
10) Andre Tackels 3.0
11) Marcel Barzin 2.5
12) Marcel Lenglez 1.0
[Event "Spa"]
[Site "Spa BEL"]
[Date "1926.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Victor Soultanbeieff"]
[Black "Arthur Dunkelblum"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 c5 4. Bd3 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. b3 cxd4 7. exd4 b6 8.
Nbd2 Bb7 9. c4 Nc6 10. Bb2 d5 11. a3 Qc7 12. Qc2 dxc4 13. bxc4 h6 14. Rad1
Rfd8 15. Rfe1 Rac8 16. h3 Ne8 17. Nb3 Kf8 {After this rather pointless move
white is able to seize the initiative. Better was 17...Bf3 which was the
point of his last move. } 18. Qe2 {Unnecessary preparation as he could have
played 18.d5 at once with good effect. } 18... a5 {Black fails to take
advantage of his opponent's momentary lapse. After 18...Nf6 then 19.d5 is
ineffective. } 19. d5 exd5 20. cxd5 Nb8 {With all of black's pieces huddling
on the 7th and 8th ranks it should be clear disaster must be lurking in the
wings. If 20.Rxd5 21.Qe4 black is in dire straits. The attacked R can
neither retreat not be defended because if 21...Rcd8 then 22.Qe4 and Qh7 gives
white a winning attack. And if 21...Nf6 he loses the R to 22.Bxf6 Bxf6
23.Qxd5. } 21. Qe4 Nf6 22. Bxf6 Bxf6 23. Qh7 {White is winning.} 23... g6 24.
Nh4 {With this move Soultanbeieff throws away all of his advantage. All black
has to do is capture the d-Pawn with 24...Bxd5. With 24.Nbd4 Bxd5 25.Bf5
white wins at least the exchange. } 24... Bg7 {This is simply horrible as
white now has a winning sacrifice. After 24...Bxd5 the sacrifice doesn't
work: 25.Bxg6 and now not 25...fag6?? 26.Nxg6 mate, but rather 25...Bxb3 and
it is black who has a winning advantage. } 25. Bxg6 {Now black loses his Q
after 25...fxg6 26.Nxg6+ Kf7 27.Re7+ } 25... Rxd5 26. Rxd5 Bxd5 27. Nf5 fxg6
28. Re7 gxf5 {The only way to avoid mate is to give up the Q. It would hold
out longer, but the result would be the same. } 29. Qxg7# 1-0
[Site "Spa BEL"]
[Date "1926.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Victor Soultanbeieff"]
[Black "Arthur Dunkelblum"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. d4 Nf6 2. Nf3 e6 3. e3 c5 4. Bd3 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. b3 cxd4 7. exd4 b6 8.
Nbd2 Bb7 9. c4 Nc6 10. Bb2 d5 11. a3 Qc7 12. Qc2 dxc4 13. bxc4 h6 14. Rad1
Rfd8 15. Rfe1 Rac8 16. h3 Ne8 17. Nb3 Kf8 {After this rather pointless move
white is able to seize the initiative. Better was 17...Bf3 which was the
point of his last move. } 18. Qe2 {Unnecessary preparation as he could have
played 18.d5 at once with good effect. } 18... a5 {Black fails to take
advantage of his opponent's momentary lapse. After 18...Nf6 then 19.d5 is
ineffective. } 19. d5 exd5 20. cxd5 Nb8 {With all of black's pieces huddling
on the 7th and 8th ranks it should be clear disaster must be lurking in the
wings. If 20.Rxd5 21.Qe4 black is in dire straits. The attacked R can
neither retreat not be defended because if 21...Rcd8 then 22.Qe4 and Qh7 gives
white a winning attack. And if 21...Nf6 he loses the R to 22.Bxf6 Bxf6
23.Qxd5. } 21. Qe4 Nf6 22. Bxf6 Bxf6 23. Qh7 {White is winning.} 23... g6 24.
Nh4 {With this move Soultanbeieff throws away all of his advantage. All black
has to do is capture the d-Pawn with 24...Bxd5. With 24.Nbd4 Bxd5 25.Bf5
white wins at least the exchange. } 24... Bg7 {This is simply horrible as
white now has a winning sacrifice. After 24...Bxd5 the sacrifice doesn't
work: 25.Bxg6 and now not 25...fag6?? 26.Nxg6 mate, but rather 25...Bxb3 and
it is black who has a winning advantage. } 25. Bxg6 {Now black loses his Q
after 25...fxg6 26.Nxg6+ Kf7 27.Re7+ } 25... Rxd5 26. Rxd5 Bxd5 27. Nf5 fxg6
28. Re7 gxf5 {The only way to avoid mate is to give up the Q. It would hold
out longer, but the result would be the same. } 29. Qxg7# 1-0
Monday, February 18, 2019
A Budding Morphy Nipped In The Bud
Leonard |
Leonard’s hangout was the Morphy Chess Rooms in New York, on the south-eastern corner of Broadway and Fourth Street. After defeating a number of the country's best players, Leonard was touted as the “New Morphy.”
Almost all of his games were played in New York. In what appears to be the one exception, he did go to Philadelphia to play a match against Philadelphia city champions William Dwight (1831-1888) who was to become a general in the Union Army during the Civil War.
Dwight was in the process of moving to Philadelphia for his business and when the Civil War broke he took a commission as a Captain on May 14, 1861, lieutenant colonel less than a month later and then a few days after that, to full colonel on July 1, 1861.
As commanding officer of 70th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment, Dwight led his regiment during the Battle of Williamsburg, where he was seriously wounded on May 5, 1862, along with losing half of his command. Left for dead on the battlefield, Dwight was found by Confederate forces and held as a prisoner of war until his eventual release in a prisoner exchange November 15, 1862. In recognition of his gallantry on the field, Dwight was promoted to brigadier general of volunteers and saw action in several battle until the end of the war. Following the war, Dwight went into the railroad business with his brother in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Leonard was leading the match by a score of +6 –3 =2 and with him needing only one more win, the match was left unfinished when Leonard returned to New York complaining that he had been the victim of double dealing by the Philadelphians.
When he got to Philadelphia, Leonard was badly treated by the local club and in a day before chess clocks, he bitterly complained of his opponent’s slow play. Leonard wrote, "If any of your readers ever had the misfortune to meet a slow antagonist, he can appreciate the agony a poor sinner must undergo who is compelled to sit motionless for 64 minutes awaiting his adversary’s move. Imagine the slowest player you ever met, and then one ten times as slow, and then you will have a remote idea of Mr. Dwight’s style of play.” At one point Dwight took three hours to make two moves.
At the outbreak of the Civil War, Leonard enlisted in the Union Army in Company F., 88th New York Volunteers, an Irish regiment on February 1, 1862. By May 31, he was fighting in the battle of Fair Oaks in Virginia where he was captured. By late September, 1862 he was dead before reaching his 21st birthday, having succumbed to dysentery while being held prisoner in Annapolis, Maryland. Leonard’s mother had received word of his capture and was on her way to visit him, but he died before she arrived.
Union wounded just before the hospital was overrun by Confederates |
There were a whole host of diseases during the Civil War and the wort was dysentery. It accounted for around 45,000 deaths in the Union army and 50,000 deaths in the Confederate army. It spread rapidly through both armies primarily because of a lack of sanitation practices and contaminated water.
Civil War medicine was not advanced enough to connect a lack of hygiene with disease. For example, during a typical surgery cleanliness was an afterthought with surgeons using the same tools continuously on patient after patient. They might wipe them off on their apron, but they were never cleaned or sanitized. Even the importance of placing a latrine downstream and away from the clean water supply was unknown. The foul water would lead to water contamination which lead to the development and spread of the disease.
Dysentery is an intestinal inflammation that causes severe diarrhea, usually characterized by mucus or blood in the feces. Left untreated, the disease can lead to rapid loss of fluids, dehydration, and eventually death.
[Event "New York City"]
[Site "New York, NY USA"]
[Date "1861.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "James A Leonard"]
[Black "Thomas Loyd"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 Ba5 6. d4 exd4 7. O-O Nge7
{This rare sideline has produced better results for black than the far more
popular 7...dxc3 or 7...d6. } 8. cxd4 d5 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. Ng5 {Premature, but
dangerous to black. Sulskis-Svidler, Moscow 2001, continued 10.Qb3 Be6
11.Qxb7 and black was much better. Correct would have been 11.Ba3 which could
also have been played here.} 10... O-O 11. Nxh7 {The logical followup to his
last move. Black should be able to survive the attack, but it will require
circumspect play.} 11... Kxh7 12. Qh5+ Kg8 13. Bxd5 Bb6 {Strictly speaking
this is not a mistake but it gives white good chances of continuing the
attack. With 13...Bg4 14.Qxg4 Qxd5 black could have eliminated all danger. }
14. Nc3 Nxd4 {Black would have done better with 14...Bxd4 attacking the N then
after 15.Bd2 Ne5 both his B and N are positioned to defend the King. } 15.
Bg5 Qd6 {White now has a promising position and should have continued his
development with 16.Rae1 seizing the open file and preventing black's next
move. } 16. Qh4 {This turns out to be a mistake that allows black to ease the
pressure by eliminating one of white's attacking pieces.} 16... Ne2+ {Well
played. } 17. Nxe2 Qxd5 18. Rad1 Qe5 19. Nf4 {White's pieces are beginning to
swarm around black's K, but he could still offer sufficient resistance with
19...Be6. Instead he creates a nasty hole in front of his K. } 19... f6 20.
Ng6 {As bad as things look for black, he still has a defense but only if he
can walk a tightrope. } 20... Qe8 {Losing. Correct was 20...Qxg5 21.Qh8+ Kf7
22.Qxf8+ Kxg6 when his K is safe and he has two Bs and a P for the R. The
outcome would not be at all clear. } 21. Qh8+ Kf7 22. Qh5 {More direct and
even better was simply 22.Nxf8.} 22... fxg5 {A gross blunder in a poor
position. He could have offered a manly defense with 22...Bf5. } 23. Nxf8+
Kxf8 24. Rd8 {A brilliant R sacrifice that finishes off his opponent. } 24...
Qxd8 25. Qh8+ Ke7 26. Qxg7+ Ke6 27. Re1+ Kf5 28. Qf7+ {There was an even
faster mate in 6 with 28.Re5+ } 28... Kg4 {Black can hold out longer with
28...Qf6, but white mates in 9 beginning with 29.g4+! } 29. Qf3+ {Also good
was 29.Re4 mate.} 29... Kh4 30. g3+ Kh3 31. Qh5# 1-0
[Site "New York, NY USA"]
[Date "1861.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "James A Leonard"]
[Black "Thomas Loyd"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. b4 Bxb4 5. c3 Ba5 6. d4 exd4 7. O-O Nge7
{This rare sideline has produced better results for black than the far more
popular 7...dxc3 or 7...d6. } 8. cxd4 d5 9. exd5 Nxd5 10. Ng5 {Premature, but
dangerous to black. Sulskis-Svidler, Moscow 2001, continued 10.Qb3 Be6
11.Qxb7 and black was much better. Correct would have been 11.Ba3 which could
also have been played here.} 10... O-O 11. Nxh7 {The logical followup to his
last move. Black should be able to survive the attack, but it will require
circumspect play.} 11... Kxh7 12. Qh5+ Kg8 13. Bxd5 Bb6 {Strictly speaking
this is not a mistake but it gives white good chances of continuing the
attack. With 13...Bg4 14.Qxg4 Qxd5 black could have eliminated all danger. }
14. Nc3 Nxd4 {Black would have done better with 14...Bxd4 attacking the N then
after 15.Bd2 Ne5 both his B and N are positioned to defend the King. } 15.
Bg5 Qd6 {White now has a promising position and should have continued his
development with 16.Rae1 seizing the open file and preventing black's next
move. } 16. Qh4 {This turns out to be a mistake that allows black to ease the
pressure by eliminating one of white's attacking pieces.} 16... Ne2+ {Well
played. } 17. Nxe2 Qxd5 18. Rad1 Qe5 19. Nf4 {White's pieces are beginning to
swarm around black's K, but he could still offer sufficient resistance with
19...Be6. Instead he creates a nasty hole in front of his K. } 19... f6 20.
Ng6 {As bad as things look for black, he still has a defense but only if he
can walk a tightrope. } 20... Qe8 {Losing. Correct was 20...Qxg5 21.Qh8+ Kf7
22.Qxf8+ Kxg6 when his K is safe and he has two Bs and a P for the R. The
outcome would not be at all clear. } 21. Qh8+ Kf7 22. Qh5 {More direct and
even better was simply 22.Nxf8.} 22... fxg5 {A gross blunder in a poor
position. He could have offered a manly defense with 22...Bf5. } 23. Nxf8+
Kxf8 24. Rd8 {A brilliant R sacrifice that finishes off his opponent. } 24...
Qxd8 25. Qh8+ Ke7 26. Qxg7+ Ke6 27. Re1+ Kf5 28. Qf7+ {There was an even
faster mate in 6 with 28.Re5+ } 28... Kg4 {Black can hold out longer with
28...Qf6, but white mates in 9 beginning with 29.g4+! } 29. Qf3+ {Also good
was 29.Re4 mate.} 29... Kh4 30. g3+ Kh3 31. Qh5# 1-0
Sunday, February 17, 2019
An Impressive Win By Bronstein
Bronstein vs. Shamkovich |
Bronstein pioneered the King’s Indian Defense, transforming it from an unknown and discredited defense into one of the most popular and dynamic openings. The was one of the first who wanted to speed up play with faster time limits and in 1973 introduced the idea of adding a time increment for each move made.
Zurich International Chess Tournament 1953 is a must own and is a great book and Bronstein is credited with being the author. It was something of a letdown to discover he only contributed analyses and that the rest of the book was written by Boris Vainshtein. Edward Winter has an interesting post on Bronstein which you can read HERE. It’s post 4753.
Vainshtein (May 19, 1907 – December 18, 1993) was from the Ukraine and was sometimes known as "Ferzberi.” He grew up in Ukraine and Uzbekistan and moved to Moscow in 1935. Vainshtein was a high-ranking Soviet NKVD and chess official and a good player, now best remembered as a friend and supporter of David Bronstein. He also authored a number of chess books himself. For more details on his NKVD activity you can read the article The Phantom of Beria in the Moscow Times.
After David Bronstein moved to Moscow he played in many of the city’s championships. In 1947 he tied for first with Ravinsky and Simagin who won the playoff with Bronstein finishing second. Bronstein successfully made attempts at winning the city championship in 1953 and 1957, both times by a two point margin.
He only finished third in 1969, then in 1961 he tied for first with Leonid Shamkovich. The genial Shamkovich (born June 1923) in Rostov-on-Don was never one of the Russian elite, but he was twice champion of the Russian Federation and qualified for the USSR championships six times.
In 1974 the Soviet authorities allowed him to leave for Israel but he soon settled in the US. He passed away on April 22, 2005. He defeated Shamkovich in the 1961 playoff match +2 -1 =3. The 1962 championship was an open and Averbakh and Vasyukov shared first a point ahead of Bronstein, Barcza, Lilienthal an Shamkovich.
I was unable to locate any games from the Bronstein-Shamkovich match in 1961, but did discover their individual game from the championship tournament and an exciting one it was. Bonstein’s mating attack with reduced material is quite impressive.
[Event "Moscow City Championship"]
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1961.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "David Bronstein"]
[Black "Leonid Shamkovich"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 d5 {Known as the Scandinavian Defense, back in the day this was called
the Center Counter Defense. Although it has never enjoyed widespread
popularity among top-flight players, it is sound. } 2. exd5 Nf6 {This and
2...Nf6 (the Marshall Gambit) are almost always played. The rare 2...c6 has
been tried, but it's unsound. } 3. d4 {Normally white plays 3.Nc3.} 3... Nxd5
4. Nf3 Bf5 {This move should result in a disadvantage; better is 4...Bg5.} 5.
a3 {White usually plays either 5.Be2 or 5.Bd3. The text is a Bronstein
experiment that has no particular value. } 5... e6 6. c4 Nb6 {Black's N turns
out not to be especially well placed here and so her should have played it
back to f6. } 7. Nc3 Be7 8. Qb3 Qc8 {It's hard to explain this poor move that
allows white to play 9.c5. Correct was 8...c5. } 9. c5 N6d7 10. Bf4 Nf6 11.
Bc4 c6 12. O-O Nd5 {The fact that half of lack's moves have been with this N
says that something has gone wrong with his opening play. } 13. Bxd5 exd5 14.
Rae1 Be6 15. Bg5 Bxg5 16. Nxg5 O-O 17. Ne2 {Maneuvering his remaining piece to
the K-side. } 17... Na6 {This turns out to be a very poor choice as the N is
destined to remain here forever. Better was 17...Nd7. } 18. Ng3 h6 19. Nxe6
fxe6 20. f4 Qd7 21. Re5 {With this move Bronstein prepares for an assault on
black's K. } 21... Rf7 22. f5 exf5 23. Nxf5 Raf8 {Hindsight says that black
would have done better to try and exchange a pair of Rs with 23...Re8.} 24.
g4 {Bronstein goes for an all out attack against black's K and black's
position has become critical. Was it worth a P for black to try bringing his
misplaced N over to the defense with 24...Nc7? White could safely take the
b-Pawn or he could choose to continue his attack with 25.Rfe1. In either case
he enjoys a considerable advantage. } 24... Qd8 {Shamkovich plans to bring his
Q to the defense of his K, but didn't appreciate the danger to which it is
going to be exposed. His game soon borders on hopeless. } 25. Rfe1 Qg5
{Allowing white to win the Q, but would it be safe to do so? } 26. Qg3 {If
26.Ne7+ Rxe7 27.Rxg5 (no better is 27.Rxe7 Qxg4+) Rxe1+ followed by ...hxg5
would give black two Rs and a N against the Q which should be greatly to his
advantage. } 26... Kh7 {Black avoids the possibility of white playing Ne7 with
check.} 27. h4 {Unnecessary preparation as the sacrifice 27.Nxh6 is
immediately decisive after 27...Qxh6 28.Rh5.} 27... Qg6 28. Kg2 h5 {From the
frying pan into the fire. This loses quickly, but there wasn't anything else
available that would even come close to saving the game.} 29. Ne7 Rxe7 30.
Rxe7 {Black is the exchange down, but with his N way over yonder on a6 he
might as well be the exchange and a piece down!} 30... hxg4 31. Qe5 g3 32.
Qg5 Rf2+ 33. Kxg3 Qxg5+ 34. hxg5 Rxb2 {A cursory glance at the position might
suggest that black has managed not only to survive, but maybe has even
equalized. But, Bronstein is not done attacking with the reduced material. }
35. R7e6 Nc7 {Going after the a-Pawn with 35...Rb3+ runs into a mating attack
after white plays 36.Kg4!! threatening g6+ putting black in a mating net. As
it is, Stockfish sees white has a mate in 17 moves.} 36. Rh1+ Kg8 37. Re7 Nb5
38. Rh8+ {Black's last move gives white a mate in 6 with 38.g8. As it is
38.Rh8+ leads to a mate in 12 moves. } 38... Kxh8 39. g6 Rb3+ 40. Kg4 {Now
40,Kf4 is mate in 5 while 40.Kg4 is a mate in 9. } 1-0
[Site "Moscow"]
[Date "1961.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "David Bronstein"]
[Black "Leonid Shamkovich"]
[Result "1-0"]
[WhiteELO "?"]
[BlackELO "?"]
%Created by Caissa's Web PGN Editor
1. e4 d5 {Known as the Scandinavian Defense, back in the day this was called
the Center Counter Defense. Although it has never enjoyed widespread
popularity among top-flight players, it is sound. } 2. exd5 Nf6 {This and
2...Nf6 (the Marshall Gambit) are almost always played. The rare 2...c6 has
been tried, but it's unsound. } 3. d4 {Normally white plays 3.Nc3.} 3... Nxd5
4. Nf3 Bf5 {This move should result in a disadvantage; better is 4...Bg5.} 5.
a3 {White usually plays either 5.Be2 or 5.Bd3. The text is a Bronstein
experiment that has no particular value. } 5... e6 6. c4 Nb6 {Black's N turns
out not to be especially well placed here and so her should have played it
back to f6. } 7. Nc3 Be7 8. Qb3 Qc8 {It's hard to explain this poor move that
allows white to play 9.c5. Correct was 8...c5. } 9. c5 N6d7 10. Bf4 Nf6 11.
Bc4 c6 12. O-O Nd5 {The fact that half of lack's moves have been with this N
says that something has gone wrong with his opening play. } 13. Bxd5 exd5 14.
Rae1 Be6 15. Bg5 Bxg5 16. Nxg5 O-O 17. Ne2 {Maneuvering his remaining piece to
the K-side. } 17... Na6 {This turns out to be a very poor choice as the N is
destined to remain here forever. Better was 17...Nd7. } 18. Ng3 h6 19. Nxe6
fxe6 20. f4 Qd7 21. Re5 {With this move Bronstein prepares for an assault on
black's K. } 21... Rf7 22. f5 exf5 23. Nxf5 Raf8 {Hindsight says that black
would have done better to try and exchange a pair of Rs with 23...Re8.} 24.
g4 {Bronstein goes for an all out attack against black's K and black's
position has become critical. Was it worth a P for black to try bringing his
misplaced N over to the defense with 24...Nc7? White could safely take the
b-Pawn or he could choose to continue his attack with 25.Rfe1. In either case
he enjoys a considerable advantage. } 24... Qd8 {Shamkovich plans to bring his
Q to the defense of his K, but didn't appreciate the danger to which it is
going to be exposed. His game soon borders on hopeless. } 25. Rfe1 Qg5
{Allowing white to win the Q, but would it be safe to do so? } 26. Qg3 {If
26.Ne7+ Rxe7 27.Rxg5 (no better is 27.Rxe7 Qxg4+) Rxe1+ followed by ...hxg5
would give black two Rs and a N against the Q which should be greatly to his
advantage. } 26... Kh7 {Black avoids the possibility of white playing Ne7 with
check.} 27. h4 {Unnecessary preparation as the sacrifice 27.Nxh6 is
immediately decisive after 27...Qxh6 28.Rh5.} 27... Qg6 28. Kg2 h5 {From the
frying pan into the fire. This loses quickly, but there wasn't anything else
available that would even come close to saving the game.} 29. Ne7 Rxe7 30.
Rxe7 {Black is the exchange down, but with his N way over yonder on a6 he
might as well be the exchange and a piece down!} 30... hxg4 31. Qe5 g3 32.
Qg5 Rf2+ 33. Kxg3 Qxg5+ 34. hxg5 Rxb2 {A cursory glance at the position might
suggest that black has managed not only to survive, but maybe has even
equalized. But, Bronstein is not done attacking with the reduced material. }
35. R7e6 Nc7 {Going after the a-Pawn with 35...Rb3+ runs into a mating attack
after white plays 36.Kg4!! threatening g6+ putting black in a mating net. As
it is, Stockfish sees white has a mate in 17 moves.} 36. Rh1+ Kg8 37. Re7 Nb5
38. Rh8+ {Black's last move gives white a mate in 6 with 38.g8. As it is
38.Rh8+ leads to a mate in 12 moves. } 38... Kxh8 39. g6 Rb3+ 40. Kg4 {Now
40,Kf4 is mate in 5 while 40.Kg4 is a mate in 9. } 1-0
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)